It is difficult to observe the growing violence in the Egyptian cities through a traditional looking glass. The classical interpretation of the political powers, their conflicts, their errors and their practices does not apply to this case. Some are saying that the Egyptian crisis has reached a dead end and that the army has committed a strategic error in assessing the situation and trying to take advantage of the June 30 movement. The Muslim Brotherhood was supposed to accept the ousting of President Mohamed Morsi just like the supporters of Hosni Mubarak did at the time of his ousting. However, there is a major difference between the two presidents and their backgrounds. When the Military Council seized control of the country after February 11, 2011, the supporters of the Mubarak regime were reassured and felt that this was a sort of a continuation for the "march" that has been proceeding since the July 1952 revolution. However, the reassurance turned into fear for the Islamists who were violently overthrown from their short-lived time in power. Those sides that call for security-related and simplistic solutions are failing to see that the Muslim Brotherhood is not a simple opportunistic political party. Rather, it represents specific social groups that believe they will go back to being marginalized once again if they were to surrender without a fight. There is definitely no room for defending the failed rule of the Brotherhood. This rule is not only at conflict with the values of the tolerant and moderate Egyptian society but also with the motives of the January 25 revolution that called for "more" political and social freedom. Moving from a security-related form of tyranny into a religious form is out of the question. This brings us to one of the major problems that Gen. Abdul Fattah Al-Sisi is suffering from. When reading the statements issued by the army and the members of the new cabinet (namely the minister of interior) one will immediately notice the complete absence of terms pertaining to the road map that Al-Sisi had alluded to during his first speech following Morsi's ousting. Going a bit further than that, one can say that the "sunglasses" speech is at complete odds with the roadmap. Indeed, the demand of the minister of defense – to obtain a mandate from the people in order to confront terrorism – is in contradiction with the principle of the law and the state of institutions. This is of particular significance if one were to account for the extreme looseness of the concept of terrorism and the possibility of applying it or not to specific groups according to the interests of the party that holds the power. The army was probably encouraged to hit the Brotherhood in the street due to the fact that this group has become secluded and the object of a wide popular dismay. However, if one were to take a look at the explicit and implicit options of the Egyptian military institution and its vision of Egypt's political future, one would not be too optimistic. Those who oppose the disastrous politics of the Brotherhood in power are entitled to wonder about the point behind appointing ministers and a prime minister belonging to the (very) old team that has already been tested and tried time after time. On the other end of this vision, there is the vision of the Islamic groups, which is biased in favor of militarization and chaos. These groups have lost hope in taking part in any political process and they fear the return of the notorious "state security" era. Meanwhile, large sections of the Egyptian society believe that the military option is the best between two evils. The support for the military stooped to the level of vulgarity at times, which surprised many Egyptians, such as in the case of an article titled, "Oh Sisi, you just wink at us." The military and its supporters are failing to see that they have so much in common not only with the Mubarak regime but also with the Muslim Brotherhood rule. Thus, the confiscation of the June 30 movement may quite simply turn into a counter revolution for the January 25 uprising. The people's chants were quite clear: "Life, freedom, and social justice."
